Freethought & Rationalism Archive

K · 10-04-2002, 06:31 AM

ManM:

Your definitions of Heaven and Hell is nice, but it really doesn't fit the traditional Christian definitions. In your Hell, a huge percentage of Christians will find torment. Many Christians talk about love, but the numbers of them I've seen that exhibit it are vanishing. At the same time, nearly all secular humanists will be in Heaven. The whole foundation of their philosophy rests on the dignity of humanity and love-thy-neighbor. So, if you really believe in the Heaven and Hell you've described, it sounds like Humanism is the right path.

Kosh · 10-04-2002, 06:38 AM

Actually, it turns out the Bible et al is a reverse entrance exam. Believers will get to the pearly gates to find St. Peter saying "Oh mon, I can't believe you fell for dat! HELL for you!".

MrDarwin · 10-04-2002, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeoTheo:


Going to hell could be likened to drowning. Jesus Christ could be likened to a life preserver. If you are to proud to grab the life preserver and therefore drown, it can be said that you drowned because of pride. There is no contradiction between not believing in Christ and not believing in Christ out of pride.
You cannot believe in Jesus and have pride. You can't be proud and believe in a savior. Proud people don't need a Savior they have themselves.

Pride has nothing to do with it. A more apt analogy would be somebody throwing you an invisible life preserver, without telling you where it is for you to grab it, or even that he has thrown it to you.

But here's the problem: the ocean was put there by the same creator as the life preserver, who is apparently the same creator who made his/her/its creations capable of drowning in the first place. And at the moment of creating all of this, he/she/it already knew whether or not you would drown in the end.

Jamie_L · 10-04-2002, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ManM:
Good grief, I go to sleep for 8 measly hours and the topic grows three more pages.

Yeah, no kidding.

As for your perception of heaven and hell, it's one I haven't heard before, and it's interesting. It actually makes much more sense to me than the more commonplace definitions. Those stricter definitions are the ones that really give me heartache WRT to the OP.

Jamie

Vanderzyden · 10-04-2002, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Starboy:


...you do tow the line for god.

Starboy

Again, I ask: What do you know about what it means to "tow the line for god."?

Vanderzyden

Vanderzyden · 10-04-2002, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jobar:


...Van, do you even begin to realize just how terribly you represent the religion you claim to espouse?!

Ron, I think you pinned him dead center- I admire your aim, and share your disgust with Vander's slimy self-righteousness.

J,

It's not a matter of inability or indignance. Rather, it is a matter of deciding with whom I will engage.

At first, it seemed like you were willing to have a serious discussion. But then you go and write disrespectfully, like Garett.

Tell me, do you find your last post and Ron's posts attractive and respectful? If not, then why would anyone want to continue a dialogue with either of you?

Neither of you realize that the bitter tone of your posts is a solid demonstration of some of the points I have been making.

Am I wounded? Not at all. Is this unexpected? Not really.

If you again reply with insults, I will shake them off like so much water from a duck's back and avoid any further direct response to you.

Vanderzyden

[ October 04, 2002: Message edited by: Vanderzyden ]

Vanderzyden · 10-04-2002, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Philosoft:


Interesting. Is it possible to have faith in the truth of things that are not true? Corollary: Are all things one professes faith in necessarily true?

Yes. It is possible to maintain unjustifable beliefs. Many theists and athiests alike hold untenable opinions.

Now, Philo, I have a similar question for you:

Is it possible that the athiest merely claims to deny what most see as obvious, and that this denial is actually a rejection of an "egomaniac" god?

Vanderzyden

[ October 04, 2002: Message edited by: Vanderzyden ]

Mageth · 10-04-2002, 08:24 AM

Is it possible that the athiest merely claims to deny what most see as obvious, and that this denial is actually a rejection of an "egomaniac" god?

You're confusing me, Van. Doesn't the bible say something along the lines of "Faith is the evidence of things not seen", and hold that such faith is the cornerstone of belief? If so, how can the belief system claim both that faith is necessary because its target cannot be "seen", and that what they "see" is "obvious"?

The Other Michael · 10-04-2002, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vanderzyden:
Is it possible that the athiest merely claims to deny what most see as obvious, and that this denial is actually a rejection of an "egomaniac" god?

Emperor's new clothes?

You appear to have a curious definition of "obvious".

cheers,
Michael

10-04-2002, 08:34 AM

Just a few random questions for the believers....

Is it possible that God himself is already in Hell? I mean, according to Christians, God is perfect. Perfection implies something completed or finished, and therefore unable to change or grow. In other words, stagnant.Christians also claim God is omniscient, and knows everything that will happen.

So, what we have here is a being that is doomed to live an eternity of stagnation and boredom, already knowing everything that is to come. Sounds pretty hellish to me. Perhaps God really is insane.

Also, I'm confused about something. Satan is often portrayed by Christians as being in "charge" of Hell:its custodian or supervisor if you will, overseeing the suffering of the wicked. Is there any Biblical basis for this belief whatsoever? It was my understanding that Satan himself was to be cast into the lake of fire at the time of judgement...so who's going to be running Hell when the boss-man and his demon hordes are roasting right alongside the sinners?

And why exactly would Satan torture sinners anyway? Aren't sinners people who have turned away from God? Wouldn't the enemy of my enemy be my friend? What would Satan gain from subjecting these people to torment? Wouldn't he in essence be doing God's work?

And what do you theists who believe in Hell as a place of unrelenting, eternal torment have to say to the Christian sects that claim there is no Biblical support for that belief? That after judgement, sinners will be annihilated or destroyed when cast into the fire, not tortured forever?

Take your time.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-04-2002, 06:31 AM	#191
K Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,485	ManM: Your definitions of Heaven and Hell is nice, but it really doesn't fit the traditional Christian definitions. In your Hell, a huge percentage of Christians will find torment. Many Christians talk about love, but the numbers of them I've seen that exhibit it are vanishing. At the same time, nearly all secular humanists will be in Heaven. The whole foundation of their philosophy rests on the dignity of humanity and love-thy-neighbor. So, if you really believe in the Heaven and Hell you've described, it sounds like Humanism is the right path.

10-04-2002, 06:38 AM	#192
Kosh Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Orions Belt Posts: 3,911	Actually, it turns out the Bible et al is a reverse entrance exam. Believers will get to the pearly gates to find St. Peter saying "Oh mon, I can't believe you fell for dat! HELL for you!".

10-04-2002, 08:24 AM	#198
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Is it possible that the athiest merely claims to deny what most see as obvious, and that this denial is actually a rejection of an "egomaniac" god? You're confusing me, Van. Doesn't the bible say something along the lines of "Faith is the evidence of things not seen", and hold that such faith is the cornerstone of belief? If so, how can the belief system claim both that faith is necessary because its target cannot be "seen", and that what they "see" is "obvious"?

10-04-2002, 08:34 AM	#200
Cthulhu Guest Posts: n/a	Just a few random questions for the believers.... Is it possible that God himself is already in Hell? I mean, according to Christians, God is perfect. Perfection implies something completed or finished, and therefore unable to change or grow. In other words, stagnant.Christians also claim God is omniscient, and knows everything that will happen. So, what we have here is a being that is doomed to live an eternity of stagnation and boredom, already knowing everything that is to come. Sounds pretty hellish to me. Perhaps God really is insane. Also, I'm confused about something. Satan is often portrayed by Christians as being in "charge" of Hell:its custodian or supervisor if you will, overseeing the suffering of the wicked. Is there any Biblical basis for this belief whatsoever? It was my understanding that Satan himself was to be cast into the lake of fire at the time of judgement...so who's going to be running Hell when the boss-man and his demon hordes are roasting right alongside the sinners? And why exactly would Satan torture sinners anyway? Aren't sinners people who have turned away from God? Wouldn't the enemy of my enemy be my friend? What would Satan gain from subjecting these people to torment? Wouldn't he in essence be doing God's work? And what do you theists who believe in Hell as a place of unrelenting, eternal torment have to say to the Christian sects that claim there is no Biblical support for that belief? That after judgement, sinners will be annihilated or destroyed when cast into the fire, not tortured forever? Take your time.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.